zlacker

>>danso+(OP)
Amazes me the number of people who cry foul when something like this occurs. “Waaa censorship! This is evil! The internet is collapsing! Omg!”

1. Archive.org probably has just disallowed access. Not outright purged.

2. Shit drops off the internet literally every day

3. It’s a site full of edgelord incels who have a history of being complete pieces of shit

4. This isn’t a precursor to some horrible dystopian future of corporate control of thoughts!!111 that happened long ago ;)

Seriously though. All the panty twisting “oh noooo” wreaks of disingenuous bullshit under the guise of “but freedoms!”

You don’t have to leave the entirety of the content up to gauge it.

I mean, do you want TWBM to archive and leave up all childporn sites it accidentally crawls or similar? So individuals can gauge if it’s /actually/ bad or if it’s just a handful of twitter users squawking?

C’mon.

>>helf+AK1
By removing records of KF, we cannot prove the acts done on KF. You know, evidence, the thing you need to know if something is true or not. Or the thing you need to prosecute people civilly (or criminally). If I wanted to rightfully go after users of KF, or KF itself, how exactly do you intend to do that when all records are destroyed.

"The guberment will handle it" - they're not, and haven't for years. The only justice to be had here is if people themselves push for it. Alphabet orgs could care less, if not already members of it.

You're being both intellectually dishonest, hyperbolic, and strawmanning at the same time. Content that is illigal is taken down as it is reported. Not all content is illigal, no one has claimed KF for things outside of organized harassment.

>>devwas+WN1
>By removing records of KF, we cannot prove the acts done on KF.

You're ignoring (what was that about "intellectual dishonesty"?) the part where this is likely still archived by them, just not publicly accessible. You're also forgetting the countless screenshots and other documentation that exists of KF from prior controversial incidents.

>>jjuliu+6Q1
> You're also forgetting the countless screenshots and other documentation that exists of KF from prior controversial incidents.

Screenshots are not a trustworthy medium. Many of the articles published about Kiwi Farms contain significant factual errors and rarely cite sources for the claims they do make.

For example, the CBC recently published an article claiming that the Christchurch shooter "revealed his intentions (on Kiwi Farms) hours before carrying out the attack".

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/day6/kiwi-farms-online-forum-1.6565...

If you read articles from 2019 it was claimed that the gunman posted on 8chan shortly before the massacre. The claim that he posted on Kiwi Farms hours before is completely new and unsubstantiated.

>>richbe+0S1
>Screenshots are not a trustworthy medium.

Sure. That's why it's likely that - again, I don't know how this still bears repeating in this comment chain - IA still has the site archived, just not publicly accessible.

>>jjuliu+vU1
> I don't know how this still bears repeating in this comment chain - IA still has the site archived, just not publicly accessible.

Because if it isn't publicly accessible it functionally doesn't exist, and what remains is a number of publications of questionable veracity.

Perhaps law enforcement will eventually be able to comb through the data, but there is no guarantee the general public ever will be able to.